Association between reversal agents (sugammadex vs. neostigmine) for neuromuscular block and postoperative pulmonary complications: A retrospective analysis

被引:0
|
作者
Ren, Aolin [1 ]
Fan, Meihan [2 ]
Gu, Zhen [1 ]
Liang, Xiao [1 ]
Xu, Liuhang [3 ]
Liu, Chengjun [1 ]
Wang, Dutian [1 ]
Chang, Hanxuan [1 ]
Zhu, Minmin [1 ,2 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Jiangnan Univ, Wuxi Peoples Hosp 2, Dept Anesthesiol, Nanjing Med Univ,Med Ctr, Wuxi 214002, Jiangsu, Peoples R China
[2] Nanjing Med Univ, Nanjing, Jiangsu, Peoples R China
[3] Hubei Univ Med, Shiyan, Hubei, Peoples R China
[4] Nanjing Med Univ, Nanjing, Peoples R China
关键词
neostigmine; neuromuscular blockade; neuromuscular blocking agents; postoperative pulmonary complications; sugammadex; ANTIBODY-DRUG CONJUGATE; BRENTUXIMAB VEDOTIN; GLEMBATUMUMAB VEDOTIN; PHASE-I; POLATUZUMAB VEDOTIN; PHARMACOKINETICS; SAFETY; MODEL; TRIAL;
D O I
10.1111/bcp.16056
中图分类号
R9 [药学];
学科分类号
1007 ;
摘要
Aims: Residual neuromuscular blockade has been linked to pulmonary complications in the postoperative period. This study aimed to determine whether sugammadex was associated with a lower risk of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) compared with neostigmine. Methods: This retrospective cohort study was conducted in a tertiary academic medical center. Patients >= 18 year of age undergoing noncardiac surgical procedures with general anesthesia and mechanical ventilation were enrolled between January 2019 and September 2021. We identified all patients receiving rocuronium and reversal with neostigmine or sugammadex via electronic medical record review. The primary endpoint was a composite of PPCs (including pneumonia, atelectasis, respiratory failure, pulmonary embolism, pleural effusion, or pneumothorax). The incidence of PPCs was compared using propensity score analysis. Results: A total of 1786 patients were included in this study. Among these patients, 976 (54.6%) received neostigmine, and 810 (45.4%) received sugammadex. In the whole sample, PPCs occurred in 81 (4.54%) subjects (7.04% sugammadex vs. 2.46% neostigmine). Baseline covariates were well balanced between groups after overlap weighting. Patients in the sugammadex group had similar risk (overlap weighting OR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.40 to 1.41) compared to neostigmine. The sensitivity analysis showed consistent results. In subgroup analysis, the interaction P-value for the reversal agents stratified by surgery duration was 0.011. Conclusion: There was no significant difference in the rate of PPCs when the neuromuscular blockade was reversed with sugammadex compared to neostigmine. Patients undergoing prolonged surgery may benefit from sugammadex, which needs to be further investigated.
引用
收藏
页码:1667 / 1676
页数:10
相关论文
共 33 条
  • [1] Influence of sugammadex versus neostigmine for neuromuscular block reversal on the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
    Jia-Feng Wang
    Zhen-Zhen Zhao
    Zheng-Yu Jiang
    Hui-Xing Liu
    Xiao-Ming Deng
    Perioperative Medicine, 10
  • [2] Influence of sugammadex versus neostigmine for neuromuscular block reversal on the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
    Wang, Jia-Feng
    Zhao, Zhen-Zhen
    Jiang, Zheng-Yu
    Liu, Hui-Xing
    Deng, Xiao-Ming
    PERIOPERATIVE MEDICINE, 2021, 10 (01)
  • [3] Sugammadex Versus Neostigmine for Neuromuscular Block Reversal and Postoperative Pulmonary Complications in Patients Undergoing Resection of Lung Cancer
    Yu, Yulong
    Wang, Huijun
    Bao, Qianqian
    Zhang, Tao
    Chen, Beini
    Ding, Jinfeng
    JOURNAL OF CARDIOTHORACIC AND VASCULAR ANESTHESIA, 2022, 36 (09) : 3626 - 3633
  • [4] Choice of neuromuscular block reversal agent to reduce postoperative pulmonary complications
    Cho, Sung-Ae
    Sung, Tae-Yun
    ANESTHESIA AND PAIN MEDICINE, 2022, 17 (02): : 121 - 131
  • [5] The effects of sugammadex vs. neostigmine on postoperative respiratory complications and advanced healthcare utilisation: a multicentre retrospective cohort study
    Suleiman, A.
    Munoz-Acuna, R.
    Azimaraghi, O.
    Houle, T. T.
    Chen, G.
    Rupp, S.
    Witt, A. S.
    Azizi, B. A.
    Ahrens, E.
    Shay, D.
    Wongtangman, K.
    Wachtendorf, L. J.
    Tartler, T. M.
    Eikermann, M.
    Schaefer, M. S.
    ANAESTHESIA, 2023, 78 (03) : 294 - 302
  • [6] Reversal of neuromuscular block with sugammadex compared with neostigmine and postoperative pulmonary complications in obese patients: meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis
    Carron, Michele
    Tamburini, Enrico
    Ieppariello, Giovanna
    Linassi, Federico
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2023, 130 (06) : E461 - E463
  • [7] Reversal of neuromuscular block by sugammadex is associated with less postoperative respiratory dysfunction in the PACU compared with neostigmine: a retrospective study
    Lee, Andrew
    Grogan, Tristan
    Gabel, Eilon
    Hofer, Ira S.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2024, 132 (01) : 175 - 177
  • [8] Residual curarization and postoperative respiratory complications following laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. The effect of reversal agents: sugammadex vs. neostigmine
    Ezri, Tiberiu
    Evron, Shmuel
    Petrov, Irina
    Schachter, Pinhas
    Berlovitz, Yitzhak
    Shimonov, Mordechai
    JOURNAL OF CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE, 2015, 1 (02) : 61 - 67
  • [9] Reversal of residual neuromuscular block with neostigmine or sugammadex and postoperative pulmonary complications: a prospective, randomised, double-blind trial in high-risk older patients
    Ledowski, Thomas
    Szabo-Maak, Zoltan
    San Loh, Pui
    Turlach, Berwin A.
    Yang, Hong Seuk
    de Boer, Hans D.
    Asztalos, Laszlo
    Shariffuddin, Ina Ismiarti
    Chan, Lucy
    Fulesdi, Bela
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2021, 127 (02) : 316 - 323
  • [10] Reversal of neuromuscular block with neostigmine and sugammadex: a retrospective cohort study in two centers using different types of neuromuscular monitoring
    Motamed, Cyrus
    Trillat, Bernard
    Fischler, Marc
    Guen, Morgan le
    Bourgain, Jean Louis
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MONITORING AND COMPUTING, 2025, 39 (01) : 141 - 148